Green Wedge Review
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
October 2012 Core Strategy Green Wedge Review w.w.w.derby.gov.uk www.derby.gov.uk Contents: Section 1: Context Section 3: Summary Introduction: Page 5 Conclusions: Page 89 Historic Context: Page 7 Section 4: Appendix Current Context: Page 9 APX1 Existing City of Derby Local Plan Review Policy: Page 95 Existing and Future Policy: Page 11 APX2 Green Wedge Definition: Page 97 Methodology: Page 13 APX3 Map of Public Footpaths and Bridleways Page 99 Section 2: Analysis APX4 Map of Cycle Network Page 101 Upper Derwent Valley: Page 17 APX5 Glossary: Page 103 Allestree / Mackworth / Markeaton: Page 21 Mickleover / Mackworth: Page 25 Mickleover / Littleover: Page 33 Littleover / Sunnyhill: Page 39 Sinfin / Sinfin Industrial Area: Page 45 Allenton / Sinfin Industrial Area: Page 50 Boulton Moor: Page 55 Lower Derwent Valley: Page 61 Spondon / Chaddesden: Page 67 Lees Brook Valley: Page 71 North Oakwood: Page 77 Chaddesden / Derwent Industrial Area: Page 81 All maps and diagrams © Crown copyright and database rights (2012) Ordnance Survey 100024913 All maps and diagrams are illustrative and are not to scale 2 Section 1: Context 3 4 rather than national policy. Therefore the principle and general boundaries of the GWs are subject to re‐ examination through the review of local planning policies. The emerging Core Strategy provides an opportunity Introduction: to review the principle of GWs, in the light of significant development pressures within and around Derby. 1.1 Green Wedges (GWs) are areas of 1.9 An important distinction can be drawn between the functions of GWs and those of the Green Belt. A primary predominantly open land that penetrate purpose of the Green Belt is to limit urban expansion and prevent the coalescence of towns and villages. This the city from the surrounding countryside, restraint is applied through the City of Derby Local Plan Review (CDLPR) and other Local Plans to the area providing separation between the different between Derby and Nottingham. In contrast, GWs are not a general constraint on the outward expansion of neighbourhoods and land uses within the the city. They are a means of ensuring thaty as the cit grows, open land linked to the countryside is city. They are a distinctive part of Derby’s incorporated within it. At city level, this is a concept of considerable importance relating directly to the quality character and are a long‐standing local of life of Derby people. policy objective. 1.10 This review seeks to establish the different roles and functions of each of the thirteen GWs currently identified 1.2 GWs help to tell the story of how the city in the CDLPR, in order to help assess whether the principle of each individual GW can still be justifiably has developed. As the city has expanded maintained. It also seeks to review all of the potential development sites that have been promoted to the City over the last few decades, small Council that are located wholly or partially within GWs. The review seeks to identify those promoted sites that settlements and villages that once lay may have a degree of potential for new development without undermining the key roles, functions and overall beyond Derby's boundaries have been character of the GWs. incorporated into the administrative area of the city. As the city has expanded outwards, 1.11 This review forms one part of the site assessment process and will help to inform decisions about where new 'wedges' of land have been deliberately left development should be located in the future. Ongoing work on the Core Strategy will need to assess all of the open and undeveloped. These thirteen promoted sites in terms of their wider economic, social and environmental impacts. areas have been specifically protected from inappropriate development by successive Figure 1.1 ‐ Location of Derby's Thirteen Green Wedges local planning policies since 1989, helping to preserve their open and undeveloped character. Derby has successfully upheld this principle in successive planning documents and appeals. 1.3 The primary function of all of the GWs is to define and enhance the urban structure of the City as a whole. This helps to overcome the impression of anonymous suburban sprawl and creates a more interesting and attractive form of development. All of the GWs also perform wider functions depending upon their specific location and surrounding context. 1.4 The majority of the GWs help to maintain the identities of the different residential neighbourhoods within the city, whilst some also act as a buffer between business and residential areas, helping to protect residential amenity. 1.5 They also penetrate the urban area of the city, providing an uninterrupted link to the open countryside. This brings the countryside into the city and provides city dwellers with the opportunity to be close to undeveloped and open areas where they can benefit from an attractive environment and have access to green infrastructure for leisure and recreation. 1.6 The uninterrupted link is one eof th factors that distinguish the GWs from other areas of open land. The overall visual, recreational and ecological value of the GWs contributes to the physical and mental well‐being of residents, helping to improve overall quality of life. 1.7 It is clear from consultation responses that maintaining the identity and character of our neighbourhoods is important to local people in Derby, particularly those residents living in the former village suburbs, some of which have areas of historic and mature local character. The GWs help to provide neighbourhoods with clear definition which can engender a sense of place and belonging, promoting a sense of community identity and contributing towards local character and distinctiveness. 1.8 Given their importance to the city's structure and their wider roles and functions it is considered that once properly defined, the GWs should have a long and certain future. However, the principle of GWs does not have the same degree of permanence as Green Belt, as they are only specifically protected by local planning policies 5 6 9. Allenton/Sinfin Industrial Estate; Historic Context: 10. Sinfin/Sinfin Industrial Estate; 2.1 The Council has long sought to preserve a measure of community and neighbourhood identity by retaining areas of open land. The following, now superseded, Local Plans contained policies which identified areas of 11. Upper Derwent Valley; open land for protection against encroaching development: 12. Chaddesden/Derwent Industrial Area; Ö Chellaston Local Plan (1985) Policies 11.2 and 11.3; 13. Lower Derwent Valley; Ö Spondon Local Plan (1989) Policy 16.1; 2.7 All thirteen of these GWs were carried forward through successive Local Plans including the Local Plan for Ö Friar Gate/Markeaton Local Plan (1990) Policies 10.1 and 10.2 (unadopted); Southern Derby (1994) and City of Derby Local Plan (1998). They continue to be protected in the current City of Derby Local Plan Review (CDLPR) by Policy E2, adopted in 2006. Ö Upper Derwentside Local Plan (1990) Policy 19.1; 2.8 All of the GWs (1‐13) have a primary function of defining and enhancing the urban structure of the City as a 2.2 In April 1989, the Council approved a Green Wedge (GW) Policy in order to strengthen the long‐standing whole. GWs 1‐8 have traditionally been recognised as having an additional function of preventing coalescence principle of maintaining open land. It established a consistent approach to the principle and definition of GWs. of neighbouring communities, whilst GWs 9‐12 provide buffer zones to protect residential amenity. It further provided a basis for development control and a framework for the preparation of site specific policies in Local Plans. It also became a guide for the positive management of GWs by the City Council and other 2.9 Much of the Lower Derwent Valley GW has a different function again. It helps to maintain a predominantly organisations. open corridor for the River Derwent; providing flood capacity and contributing to the attractiveness of the city’s urban structure by enhancing its major physical feature. Part 2 of this document provides more detail on the 2.3 Paragraph 2.1 of the 1989 policy identified two essential characteristics of GWs: wider roles and functions of each of the GWs. Ö They have an open and undeveloped character; Ö They penetrate the urban area from the open countryside; 2.4 It went on to state that, although they can play a variety of roles, their primary function derives from these two characteristics. Essentially, land within GWs must exhibit these characteristics in order for the GW to be capable of defining and enhancing the urban structure of the city as a whole. Closely related to this primary function is their role of maintaining neighbourhood identity. This element of the function of GWs has grown in importance over the years, especially in the light of national and local objectives to promote local distinctiveness. 2.5 As time has progressed the importance of the wider roles and functions of GWs have started to be recognised. This is discussed later in the document. 2.6 The 1989 policy identified the following thirteen GWs: 1. Alvaston/Chellaston; 2. Littleover/Sunnyhill; 3. Mickleover/Littleover; 4. Mackworth/Mickleover/Littleover; 5. Allestree/Mackworth/Markeaton Brook; 6. North Oakwood, incorporating Chaddesden Wood and Oakwood Park; 7. Lees Brook Valley; 8. Spondon/Chaddesden; 7 8 Although not supported by government policy in the same way as Green Belts, they can serve to identify smaller areas of separation between settlements. Provision will be made in GWs for the retention or creation Current Context: of green infrastructure and green links between urban open spaces and the countryside, and for the retention and enhancement of public access facilities, particularly for recreation.